DONATING FUNDS FOR NATIONAL SECURITY: A NEW PARADIGM FOR DISASTER

A couple of days ago, I read a news item on Ghana web emanating from GNA that struck me rather as rather unique. The news item I am referring to was titled: “Fidelity Bank Donates $50,000.00 to GAF.”

In sum and substance, the report indicated that the Fidelity Bank (in Ghana) has presented a “check for GHC $50,000 to the Ghana Armed Forces” to complement government's efforts at re-equipping the force to enable it to perform its duties effectively.” It was not clear from the GNA report whether the quote above was an editorial comment by the reporter or that it came from the benevolent donating bank.

Be that as it may, the Managing Director of the bank, Mr. Edward Effah, is reported to have stated that the donation was “the bank's contribution to maintaining national security, which was necessary for investment and smooth business development.”

The Minister of Defense, Lieutenant General Joseph Henry Smith (retired), who, according to the report, received the check on behalf of the Armed Forces said that “efforts were underway to reposition the GAF to assist other security agencies to cope with any security threat.”

It would seem that this statement coming, as it does (or did) from the singularly pre-eminent individual in charge of the Ghana Armed Forces, and by definition, our national security, is startling, to say the least. But even more startling, the Minister of Defense, in receiving this gift from the Bank, openly reveals and disgorges national security secrets: Simply put; he declares to the world that there is a Board to review the organizational structure of the GAF in “order to address deficiencies as well as logistics” to make it more “functional.” To top it off, the Minister is reported to have said that “the government was considering entering into public-private mutual partnership as well as seeking support from development partners to help address the logistical problems of the security agencies.”

The Minister of Defense then commended Fidelity Bank for the donation and appealed to other corporate bodies to emulate the fine gesture of Fidelity Bank.

Initially, I confess I do not know the corporate set up of Fidelity Bank. I am not fully advised of their share holding structure and interests. I do not know its principal owners or stake holders, but I do know something fundamental. It is a bank concerned principally with ensuring on appropriate return on the investments of its share holders. It is not in the business of national security. The Managing Director states that his donation is for a contribution to maintaining national security.” And as Americans say; “Yeah Right!!!”

But, perhaps, far more objectionable in the drama is the Minister's announced view addressing in public, the perceived “deficiencies” in our national defense structure and the weakness in the operation of our “logistics” and the stated government's readiness to engage in “public-private” partnership to help address “the logistical problem” being faced by our national security/defense apparatus. Then there is the minister's call on others to “emulate” the donating stance of Fidelity Bank.

One would have thought that the Minister of Defense, a retired military officer, is fundamentally educated about the hard-core sanctity of our national security issues; that issues relating to perceived “deficiencies” and “logistical” problems are classified and our national security is most certainly not a subject matter for “public-private partnership.” The notion that a privately run financial institution, seeking to maximize its profits and power margins, will donate money to our highest security institution and, in appreciation of that gesture, the Minister himself makes certain “classified” statements relating to our weaknesses, is abhorrent to my sense of national security.

I believe that there are organizations such as the Armed Forces Wives Association and similarly functioning entities that should be the beneficiaries of such financial largesse – if one wants to be charitable. Our national security is not and should not be for sale under the guise of “donations” from any private institution however well intentioned. Beware of Trojan horses!

As a practical measure the amount donated should be returned immediately to Fidelity Bank. The subject matter (private donations for national defense) must be taken up by our national Parliament to examine the propriety of such donations; and, the forensic modality to account for such monies that purport to contribute to national security, if Parliament determines that to be appropriate, must be defined for all to see.

The constitutional mandate created for our defense establishment does not anticipate private donations to achieve our national objectives. The governing directive in this: “The Armed Forces Council shall advise the President on matters of policy relating to defense and strategy including the role of the Armed Forces, military budgeting and finance…” (See: Article 214(1) of the 1992 Constitution). I invite the President to institute a rock-solid policy that outlaws all such gift giving by institutions directed to purportedly enhancing our national security. We will all be the more secured for it.

Dennis Adjei-Brenyah, Esq.
Attorney and Counselor at Law